Printable View
Very surprised that there hasn't been a thread yet about today or the speech. Here's a link to a transcript of the speech:
Inauguration Speech Transcript
A pretty sober speech with a very healthy dose of hope, which President Obama wrote the weekend before last. Here's hoping!
I felt his speech was mediocre at Best.
Xaxer calls Barack every 5 mins. on his private phone saying...
Is it fixed yet?
Is it fixed yet?
Is it fixed yet?
Is it fixed yet?
Is it fixed yet?
What ?
it's not like I was on a loud speaker asking him to throw out the first pitch!!!
Check this out. It's a collection of photographs so that you can navigate through the crowd at the inauguration.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2009/44....ion/themoment/
I liked the speech, I liked it alot. If only because for once I think that maybe, just maybe, this might be a president who's doing more than spouting a crock of shit. He might, possibly, just, mean some of what he says.
I enjoyed the speech. I thought it was sober, sincere and responsible combined with patriotism and great hope.
As with most Obama related things, the inauguration was incredibly overhyped. But still, it was a pretty amazing day in the history of our country and I was pretty excited about it.
I am looking forward to our country being more supportive of its president, regardless of the politics. I do not look forward to the point where people realize their impossible expectations have not been met.
Given my Democratic ways, I enjoyed his speech.
What I enjoyed more was the reaction from the crowd, both individually and as a whole. It was very meaningful for so many people. The sea of waving flags was pretty amazing.
For so long, our country was pretty apathetic about elections and the government in general. Young people finally got out to vote, so their voice could be heard. I never voted when I was in college. I think I was probably 25 when I first voted. It is sad. I missed out on 7 years of voting.
Hopefully, people will now become more involved in the political process and in the country in general.
Thoughts on inauguration:
People boo'ed Bush. I thought that was pretty sad, really. It was a day to look forward to the future and to show respect for the office of the President.
Rick Warren didn't get boo'ed, somewhat surprising to me.
The oath got flubbed up. A brief joking comment was made "I'm not sure he IS President but if that ever goes to the Supreme Court, there'll be one justice who votes in his favor."
Do we HAVE to have a poem? I mean, really, so dull.
Obama's speech was pretty much like any other politician's speech: lots of words and promises. We'll have to see if he can make those words into actions.
One thing that surprised me because I'd never thought about it before. The VP's oath is actually more complex than that of the President. I really wonder why the president's oath is so short.
Ismenia, this isn't meant towards you. This is a general comment. I imagine your post was reflective of some of the hype you've been subjected to since the election.
This is the kind of Obama-hype I was referring to. Voter turnout was roughly the same in 2008 as it was in 2004.Quote:
Originally posted by Ismenia
For so long, our country was pretty apathetic about elections and the government in general. Young people finally got out to vote, so their voice could be heard.
And even youth turnout only increased by 4 or 5 percentage points, after increasing 6 to 7 percentage points from 2000 to 2004.
As I said, I'm excited about the new president and all the potential it represents. But people need to not get so carried away and let the media's Obamasms totally warp reality. Getting expectations super high can be dangerous.
I wanted to sit down and think a bit about how to phrase this because I think it's pretty wonderful and I wanted to express myself well. Unfortunately I have a busy day at work so I'll just have to shoot from the hip.
I agree with Ari that there's a lot of Obama hype, and I certainly agree that a lot of people left of center are going to be disappointed with his performance (and many already are about his appointments) - conversely a lot of conservatives will probably be pretty relieved.
Hrm, how do I say this? While the Obama hype is cynical, I think it speaks about something pretty amazing in humanity, this positive, joyful hope. I also remember being really moved by it after NYC pulled together after 9/11.
I think that people are really hopeful that the election of a Black President means that the US has finally moved on from its racist past. I think this carries with it all sorts of hope about unity and friendship and working together. I'm not really addressing whether the reason for the hope is misplaced (I think it probably is), but the fact that somewhere around 2 million people gathered in joy is amazing. The fact that thousands upon thousands of people were stuck in a freezing tunnel for hours on end, without rioting, or needing a police presence, but just being stoic and joyful, well, I mean, it's just one of those things that makes me go wow, people really do want to be happy and live in a happy community.
Ari is right there, truth is Barack won more of the Rural ,white, vote than four years ago that was what really swung a lot of states, more so than even the urban black increased voting or the younger voters, though both did increase too.
I am glad to see he froze salaries, and banned lobbist gifting.
also the statement " just because the government can legally block information from the people does not mean it should" shows that he is changing old school norms already.
And I voted for the other guy. ;)
It is precisely -because- they respect the office of the President that they boo'ed someone they thought had done a bad job.Quote:
Originally posted by Marah
Thoughts on inauguration:
People boo'ed Bush. I thought that was pretty sad, really. It was a day to look forward to the future and to show respect for the office of the President.
Blindly cheering someone who you think wasn't worthy of the post just because they HAD/HAVE the post is just ridiculous.
I missed the booing. That is pretty rude no matter what party.
I agree.Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
As with most Obama related things, the inauguration was incredibly overhyped.
I am so sick of all the hype BS surrounding Obama. He's nothing special and I believe that his speech was also nothing special.
This being said, I of course, still hope he manages to do some good as president.
I thought it was pretty telling of the left when they sang the "...na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye..." song when GWB was heading to the dais. Not that is was surprising in the least. It's the kind of class we have seen since the day after the 2000 elections.
Haven't seen the avalanche of articles and news stories on '...how can they be spending this type of money on an inauguration in the midst of this economic crisis..' as they did in 2004. 40 Million as opposed to 150 million+. Again, not at all surprised.
The Inauguration benediction delivered by the esteemed Dr. Joseph Lowery was nothing short of offensive to me. "...when white will embrace what's right...". Seriously??? This guy can just go fk himself as far as I am concerned.
Yeah, I pretty much stopped listening to that guy. I don't know WHO the guy was who offered the prayer at the inaugural luncheon, but he definitely should have done the benediction instead. My dad and I were quite pleased with his humility and prayer.Quote:
Originally posted by Dorain
The Inauguration benediction delivered by the esteemed Dr. Joseph Lowery was nothing short of offensive to me. "...when white will embrace what's right...". Seriously??? This guy can just go fk himself as far as I am concerned.
You have no way of knowing the political views of the people who were singing. There could have been many disenfranchised people with right wing attitudes in the crowd.Quote:
I thought it was pretty telling of the left when they sang the "...na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye..." song when GWB was heading to the dais. Not that is was surprising in the least. It's the kind of class we have seen since the day after the 2000 elections.
Yeah, what was Bush's approval rate when he finally left office? Something like 22%? I'm betting there was plenty of people from both sides of the fence celebrating that he was finally gone.
This isn't an us vs them thing. People weren't booing Bush because he was conservative, they were booing because he did a crappy job.
Either way, it was tacky and says a lot about Americans. It was an inauguration, not a wrestling match. :(Quote:
Originally posted by leira
This isn't an us vs them thing. People weren't booing Bush because he was conservative, they were booing because he did a crappy job.
What greater show of democracy than the cheer or the boo? Seriously. The people spoke, and then they shouted too.
Damn them for availing themselves of that pesky first amendment!
I find the hype pretty excessive, but I think it is going too far to say he is nothing special.Quote:
Originally posted by Loigan
I am so sick of all the hype BS surrounding Obama. He's nothing special and I believe that his speech was also nothing special.
He is the first black president of the United States. That's pretty darn special.
Wow. Seriously? That's disgusting.Quote:
Originally posted by Dorain
I thought it was pretty telling of the left when they sang the "...na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye..." song when GWB was heading to the dais. Not that is was surprising in the least. It's the kind of class we have seen since the day after the 2000 elections.
It just goes to show the way politics has become a game rather than an important discussion of ideas.
There are plenty of ways to express your negative opinion of a President or other politician's job. The number one way is through your vote. I don't think there was any lack of negative expression towards GWB's handling of the job. That message was loud and clear. Childish taunting is inappropriate at such an event.
One of the most amazing things about the inauguration of a President is it represents one of the greatest historic accomplishments of the United States: the first peaceful transfer of executive power in world history. The whole process should be treated with respect and maturity, not childish sports jibes.
Bush basically spent the last 8 years completely ignoring negative/dissenting opinions. This was immensely frustrating for alot of people. While I don't think taunting him was very classy, I understand why they did it.Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
There are plenty of ways to express your negative opinion of a President or other politician's job.
Bush was an -extremely- contraversial president. I don't think peoples actions towards him are indicative of how they will treat future presidents. While I doubt Obama will live up to all of the hype, I find it even more unlikely that he will earn the level of vitriol that Bush did in his time in office.
I agree Leira. People can be forgiven for creating the huge hype for Obama. Americans have had to put up ineptitude, cronyism, nepotism and passing the blame for the last 8 years. The people are craving intelligent, progressive leadership were meritocracy is used to determine political appointments and position. Enough people saw this hope in Obama and are praying they've chosen the right person for the job.
Wow. Lets hop off the historical revisionism train. 4 years ago Bush wasn't doing any better than he was now, and he got re-elected. Obama only won by 7 percentage points. So drop the revisionistic belief that Obama was swept into the White House with a tsunami of popular support. More than 47% of the nation didn't "crave" anything Obama has to offer, and more than 60 million people specifically voted against him.Quote:
Originally posted by kestra
I agree Leira. People can be forgiven for creating the huge hype for Obama. Americans have had to put up ineptitude, cronyism, nepotism and passing the blame for the last 8 years. The people are craving intelligent, progressive leadership were meritocracy is used to determine political appointments and position. Enough people saw this hope in Obama and are praying they've chosen the right person for the job.
There's no reason to forgive people for irrational behavior, be it positive or negative. And if you think the process for filling offices will be significantly different under Obama than it was under Bush you are utterly fooling yourself. The sad reality is none of our politicians are significantly different from each other, and the two parties definitely are not.
Bush was a bad President, but he was nowhere near as bad as say, Jimmy Carter. I have a feeling you'll have all sorts of excuses for the Peanut President, and all of them purely partisan.
Take away partisan politics, and Bush is just a poor, weak president - he isn't the horrible demon the radical MoveOn.org, Daily Kos left makes him out to be. The biggest tragedy of the idiot left is they actually force moderates to defend him - moderates who don't WANT to defend him because they also think he sucked.
And all of this is irrelevant. He was our President. He did what he felt was best for the country, and obviously most people think he failed. But if you think he deliberately set out to do a bad job, or if you think he does not genuinely love this county, you are nothing but a partisan fool. Regardless of how you feel about his choices or his politics, he deserves respect - certainly around transfer of power time. This is a time to celebrate the United States political process - a process that literally transformed the world. It is not the time for childish mental midgets to sing "na na na na" and other such inanities.
I'm hearing a lot of bad things about Bush on this thread... And though I'm not completely happy with the Bush administration (being a STAUNCH conservative) I think we have to remember that Bush is a wartime president, and that this unpopular war isn't the first unpopular war in this country's history though it is not the most bloody, nor the least justified.
It's not entirely unlikely that the lense of history will shine a much more friendly light on the Bush administration than the lens of the American media. And comparing Bush to Carter, even saying that he's not as bad as Carter is a bit much I think.
I was in Grade 1 or 2 when Carter was president. I don't have much to say about him.Quote:
Bush was a bad President, but he was nowhere near as bad as say, Jimmy Carter. I have a feeling you'll have all sorts of excuses for the Peanut President, and all of them purely partisan.
Booing a president is not irrational. Politicians get booed all the time in my country. This was one of the reasons Bush never addressed the Canadian House of Commons. He can't handle it. He's done little to garner respect in my books.
http://www.metrobostonnews.com/us/ar...0-72/index.xmlQuote:
Wow. Lets hop off the historical revisionism train. 4 years ago Bush wasn't doing any better than he was now, and he got re-elected. Obama only won by 7 percentage points. So drop the revisionistic belief that Obama was swept into the White House with a tsunami of popular support. More than 47% of the nation didn't "crave" anything Obama has to offer, and more than 60 million people specifically voted against him.
Bush's approval rating was definitely higher (but by no means high) 4 years ago than it was at the end of 2008. Make no mistake; Bush was successfully re-elected partially because they frightened the people into believing a changing of the guard was too risky. Dick Cheney quoted the bullshit statistic that the likelihood of another terrorist attack was higher if the DNC were elected. Bush was the epitome of image over substance.
Sadly, you're probably right. I'm still hopeful that the country is heading in a better direction. Bush has done alot of damage, and I hope Obama can repair America's image abroad.Quote:
There's no reason to forgive people for irrational behavior, be it positive or negative. And if you think the process for filling offices will be significantly different under Obama than it was under Bush you are utterly fooling yourself. The sad reality is none of our politicians are significantly different from each other, and the two parties definitely are not.
I loathe Bush. I utterly despise him and virtually everything he stands for. NORMALLY I would be the first to egg on anyone heckling him. BUT, this was not about Bush. If ANY event can be said to be completely about the President as head of state and NOT AT ALL about the president himself, it would have to be the inauguration. People of all ideological stripes come together to celebrate the office of President and all that the Executive Branch means and does for our American way of life.
I am an American living abroad, and all I can say is that the booing and heckling did not play well here with the British folk I know. They feel that perhaps with our head of State being an elected official Americans lose sight of the appropriate way to behave at such events, but I KNOW we Americans know better.
The heckling took away from what should have been our finest moment, and the people who did is should be ashamed of themselves.
I agree completely. No amount of "but but... we didn't like his politics" justifies it. But what can be expected from the MoveOn.org, Daily Kos radicals? As I said, one of the many bad things about their behavior is they force moderates (and even some liberals) to defend Bush. In the end, their booing backfires while also making them (and Americans in general) look like immature fools.Quote:
Originally posted by Graeblyn
BUT, this was not about Bush. If ANY event can be said to be completely about the President as head of state and NOT AT ALL about the president himself, it would have to be the inauguration. People of all ideological stripes come together to celebrate the office of President and all that the Executive Branch means and does for our American way of life.
...
The heckling took away from what should have been our finest moment, and the people who did is should be ashamed of themselves.
It also takes away from the overall positive feeling that we should come away with from the inauguration and transfer of power. It is a positive historic moment to have our first black president. And as I already said, the event has worldwide historic importance as commemorative of the first peaceful transfer of executive power in world history.
You simply do not know that this is who was doing it. You're making things up.Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
I agree completely. No amount of "but but... we didn't like his politics" justifies it. But what can be expected from the MoveOn.org, Daily Kos radicals?
I did a search on DKos for 'na', 'nah' 'hey hey' etc, (which you can do to verify my claim) and not one single DKos person said they sung that there. A few people commented that it happened, a few on how funny it was, a few people commented on how appropriate it was, a few people said it disrespected the office, a few people said that conservatives will use this against the left.
Darion, why don't you give us a lecture on generalizations or something appropriate.
This statement, unfortunately, is an acknowledgement of racism. If someone is significant as a president only because of his skin colour (we have yet to see him actually _do_ anything significant, given that he's been president for what, less than 48 hours?), then clearly the American populace is still highly racist. Unless there had been a law against dark-skinned presidents, that law had been repealed, and Obama were the first to be elected under the new lack-of-law, it's just racism. Unfortunate but true.Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
I find the hype pretty excessive, but I think it is going too far to say he is nothing special.
He is the first black president of the United States. That's pretty darn special.
Representative democracy. Theoretically, you're in power to represent the people who voted for you... practically, you're in power for yourself. So long as you do enough popular things to get yourself re-elected, you can pretty much do what you like for the rest, and nobody is going to stop you from "taking (your) friends and giving them places about the court - that's always done". Left-wing and right-wing just mean your declared policies, but behind those policies is always a whole lot of the skills and interests that without which you wouldn't go into politics at all. I can't imagine myself, for instance, as president of the US (not just because I'm not a citizen, either) - and I don't have the "politician nature".Quote:
... if you think the process for filling offices will be significantly different under Obama than it was under Bush you are utterly fooling yourself. The sad reality is none of our politicians are significantly different from each other, and the two parties definitely are not.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
You simply do not know that this is who was doing it. You're making things up.
I did a search on DKos for 'na', 'nah' 'hey hey' etc, (which you can do to verify my claim) and not one single DKos person said they sung that there. A few people commented that it happened, a few on how funny it was, a few people commented on how appropriate it was, a few people said it disrespected the office, a few people said that conservatives will use this against the left.
Too funny.
No, that is not racism. It is acknowledgment of a first. For anything to be possible, it has to happen at least once. That is why "firsts" are so interesting and newsworthy.Quote:
Originally posted by Rosuav
This statement, unfortunately, is an acknowledgement of racism. If someone is significant as a president only because of his skin colour (we have yet to see him actually _do_ anything significant, given that he's been president for what, less than 48 hours?), then clearly the American populace is still highly racist.
Recognizing the youngest person to win the French Open is not ageism. When we eventually get our first President who was born in the 22nd century, it will be recognized as well. That is not century-ism. Martin Van Buren was the first President actually born in the United States. Recognizing that was not/is not jingoism. We recognize firsts because they are interesting and important.
I also recognize the importance of Obama's presidency because firsts like these will help (some) black people feel more enfranchised. That is a positive thing. Even though it is mostly a psychological factor, psychological factors matter.
Obama's presidency is tremendously precident setting. It truly does give hope and courage for greatness to other minorities. Who knows? Maybe in 50 years we'll have a gay president.
I have to ask, what does it matter if one is gay? It seems to me that people who are worried about such things are in fact more racist/homo-whatever-ic/in general worried about such things because it's a minority. If you voted for Obama because he was black and NOT because of his politics, then you are racist.Quote:
Originally posted by kestra
Obama's presidency is tremendously precident setting. It truly does give hope and courage for greatness to other minorities. Who knows? Maybe in 50 years we'll have a gay president.
I'm getting rather annoyed because I keep hearing about "first black president". Guess what. Intelligent, normal white people weren't really fighting against his election based on skin color. I heard a black guy the other day talking about how it was a major victory for black America. A victory? How. Nobody, well, not anybody worth caring what their opinion was, was actively trying to stop him because of his skin color.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/b...5849626371.jpgQuote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
No, that is not racism. It is acknowledgment of a first. For anything to be possible, it has to happen at least once. That is why "firsts" are so interesting and newsworthy.
This is true, but the amount of airtime given to "Wow, first black president" is way more than "Wow, first president from Illinois" or something which would be equally noteworthy. The massive significance of his victory is that a lot of people would have chosen not to vote for him specifically because he is black. That's what I meant. What would be very interesting to know, though (and impossible to find out), would be how many people voted, not _for_ Obama, but _against_ his opposition...Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
No, that is not racism. It is acknowledgment of a first. For anything to be possible, it has to happen at least once. That is why "firsts" are so interesting and newsworthy.
Recognizing the youngest person to win the French Open is not ageism. When we eventually get our first President who was born in the 22nd century, it will be recognized as well. That is not century-ism. Martin Van Buren was the first President actually born in the United States. Recognizing that was not/is not jingoism. We recognize firsts because they are interesting and important.
It matters to A LOT of people on both sides (people who are pro or against gay rights). As Ari said, it would be a first; just like the first female prez, first gay prez, first Muslim prez, etc...Quote:
I have to ask, what does it matter if one is gay? It seems to me that people who are worried about such things are in fact more racist/homo-whatever-ic/in general worried about such things because it's a minority.
Ask a black person who was alive during MLK's time and you'll understand why it's so important. Many gay people today are still harassed, beaten and killed SOLELY because of their sexuality. Having a gay president of the United States would send an unequivocal message to the country and the rest of the world, saying WE ARE EQUAL.
...steps down from his soapbox
But there's a difference between statistical curiosity ("Hey look, this is the first president who's never been a state governor before") and things that are of major personal interest, like the three you mention above.Quote:
Originally posted by kestra
It matters to A LOT of people on both sides (people who are pro or against gay rights). As Ari said, it would be a first; just like the first female prez, first gay prez, first Muslim prez, etc...
The fact is, though, that that equality simply doesn't exist. The more people talk about it, the more obviously it doesn't exist. By the way, can I please put a [citation needed] tag on most of your statements?Quote:
Ask a black person who was alive during MLK's time and you'll understand why it's so important. Many gay people today are still harassed, beaten and killed SOLELY because of their sexuality. Having a gay president of the United States would send an unequivocal message to the country and the rest of the world, saying WE ARE EQUAL.
...steps down from his soapbox
I think some would consider that in itself a victory.Quote:
Originally posted by Gromgor
Nobody, well, not anybody worth caring what their opinion was, was actively trying to stop him because of his skin color.
I think that might actually be my point. His getting elected isn't a major victory. It was all the other things that allowed it was the actual victory. I suppose one could say this is simply recognition of it all. I just can't help but feel that a lot of people voted for him simply because he was black, because doing so kind of "stuck it to the man". Yet "the man" had long since changed it's opinion of such things. Pretty much only the loonies nowadays would actively work against such a thing. Yet that aspect of the election has not even been spoken of in passing.Quote:
Originally posted by leira
I think some would consider that in itself a victory.
That is an interesting point. White people have something to be proud of from this as well: the fact that nothing insane happened and a lot of white people had no problem voting for someone of a different race.Quote:
Originally posted by Gromgor
Yet "the man" had long since changed it's opinion of such things. Pretty much only the loonies nowadays would actively work against such a thing. Yet that aspect of the election has not even been spoken of in passing.
I know I know... god forbid anyone say something nice about white people. But there it is.
So does this mean The White House is no longer white?
Ooooooh I'm such a bitch!! :p
It also means you're unoriginal and unfunny.Quote:
Originally posted by kestra
So does this mean The White House is no longer white?
Ooooooh I'm such a bitch!! :p
And you're a tough room!
To be honest, I think there was alot of people that never thought they'd vote for a black president - until Obama convinced them to. And it wasn't ALL just because of his stance, either. He convinced alot of people to believe in him.
Booing at the inauguration sounds pretty dumb. It's not a basketball game. And I never really bothered talking about the president or the elections with someone if I heard them say something about how they -hate- Bush or something of the sort.
Things like that are alot more sensitive and mean alot more if the US is currently fighting overseas.